That said, the fact that this is announced just before the election is about to start is very interesting. Wonder if he's still trying to destroy the NDP as revenge for deposing him.

Sun Media is all about Trudeau bashing - my guess is that Mulcair will be doing anti-Trudeau columns. Old Sun News Network channel was always a big Mulcair fan. They featured more postive pieces about him, while they went 100% negative on Trudeau,

We could at least have the courtesy to see what he has to say before passing judgement. Maybe he'll be some sort of contrary voice, like Tom Parkin who sought the NDP nomination in Parkdale-High Park.

That said, the fact that this is announced just before the election is about to start is very interesting. Wonder if he's still trying to destroy the NDP as revenge for deposing him.

The Sun chain has had a few genuinely left-wing columnists over the years. Dave Billington, who wrote on entertainment in the Edmonton Sun in the 80s, was probably the most left-wing columnist in the city at that time(he was pretty progressive even by national standards). And Lyn Cockburn, who also wrote for the feminist magazine Herizons, had a column in the Winnipeg Sun(maybe still does?)

That said, I've always had doubts about how genuinely left-wing Mulcair is, but that's based on his history of party affiliation, not which newspaper he ended up working for after leaving politics.

As ugly as the Sun can be, IMHO there's also a dismal sameness between the various msm platforms unfortunately. As a token, toothless lefty, Mulcair will have a little box to say whatever he wishes, add a faux 'balance' to the SUN brand, and maybe even help sell a few more papers, which is doubtless the intention. Based upon his lackluster NDP performance[ 'I am an ardent supporter of Israel in all situations and circumstances' etc], I'm sure the Canadian ruling class has nothing to fear. Perhaps that's why Trudeau recently announced he is going to subsidize the msm with nice fat cheques of the people's tax-dollars to continue their fine work keeping Canuckleheads so ill informed, stupid and subservient to power.

Doesn't matter what he writes. He's giving credibility to a right-wing media outlet.

When I read a column by a left-winger in a right-wing outlet, it doesn't make me more likely to believe anything else that they publish. The most it might do is make me think "Well, I'm glad to see they give space to the other side."

Further down memory lane, I also remember Dave Barrett in the 80s writing at least one column for Alberta Report, which was the ancestral publication to Rebel Media, and which, frankly, made Levant's outlet look moderate.

And Pam Barrett, an Edmonton NDP MLA and later party leader, did a stint hosting a phone-in show on a local talk-radio station that was otherwise dominated by right-wing crazies.

Not sure what, if any, cui bono analysis you could do of that column. Normally, saying that a far-right winger makes a right-winger look moderate is done to benefit the right-winger, eg. the Lake Of Fire attacks on Wildrose re-electing the Alberta Tories in 2012.

However...

That’s where Max comes in. He becomes the shield for Scheer to parry those attacks. Right-wing ideologue? You must be referring to my friend Maxime Bernier …

Scheer will always appear middle-of-the-road by comparison to Max la Menace. In a campaign where personal attacks will abound, that can only help Scheer.

This doesn't sound like Mulcair really wants people to think that Scheer is a moderate, just that that's how it's going to "appear" during the campaign, as a result of the contrast with Bernier. Back to my earlier comparison, Alison Redford's hacks didn't tell people that she "appeared" moderate, they really wanted people to think she was.

The column seems just more an attempt at Insider Baseball predictions, rather than an attempt to convince the reader to vote one way or another.

That said, I've always had doubts about how genuinely left-wing Mulcair is, but that's based on his history of party affiliation, not which newspaper he ended up working for after leaving politics.

I've asked this before and never received an answer so I'll ask again.

Wanting to get into provincial politics in Quebec, which party is a left wing federalist supposed to run for given that there are no viable left wing federalist options? People criticize Mulcair for having ran for the Quebec Liberals, but they're never able to state which party he should've ran for instead.

That said, I've always had doubts about how genuinely left-wing Mulcair is, but that's based on his history of party affiliation, not which newspaper he ended up working for after leaving politics.

I've asked this before and never received an answer so I'll ask again.

Wanting to get into provincial politics in Quebec, which party is a left wing federalist supposed to run for given that there are no viable left wing federalist options? People criticize Mulcair for having ran for the Quebec Liberals, but they're never able to state which party he should've ran for instead.

Indeed. I have criticized Mulcair a lot, but never understood why the Quebec Liberal thing kept getting thrown out there as proof that the NDP should have known better than to choose the guy. There are a lot of reasons for people to have issues with Mulcair having been leader, but why was THAT brought up over and over again? And why was it belabored, endlessly, by the federal Liberal sympathizers on this board? Who the hell were those folks to judge on that point?

The imperialist corporate media needs a further radical materialistic media outlet to strengthen and maintain its own cloak of feeble progressive image to protect the corporations Trojan horse of materialism.

That said, I've always had doubts about how genuinely left-wing Mulcair is, but that's based on his history of party affiliation, not which newspaper he ended up working for after leaving politics.

I've asked this before and never received an answer so I'll ask again.

Wanting to get into provincial politics in Quebec, which party is a left wing federalist supposed to run for given that there are no viable left wing federalist options? People criticize Mulcair for having ran for the Quebec Liberals, but they're never able to state which party he should've ran for instead.

Indeed. I have criticized Mulcair a lot, but never understood why the Quebec Liberal thing kept getting thrown out there as proof that the NDP should have known better than to choose the guy. There are a lot of reasons for people to have issues with Mulcair having been leader, but why was THAT brought up over and over again? And why was it belabored, endlessly, by the federal Liberal sympathizers on this board? Who the hell were those folks to judge on that point?

All I know is I saw Mulcair twice on Politics with Don Newman (around 16 or 17 years ago) identifying himself as a supporter of Alan Rock when talking about who should succeed Chretien. He was on a panel with another Liberal MNA.

That said, I've always had doubts about how genuinely left-wing Mulcair is, but that's based on his history of party affiliation, not which newspaper he ended up working for after leaving politics.

I've asked this before and never received an answer so I'll ask again.

Wanting to get into provincial politics in Quebec, which party is a left wing federalist supposed to run for given that there are no viable left wing federalist options? People criticize Mulcair for having ran for the Quebec Liberals, but they're never able to state which party he should've ran for instead.

Indeed. I have criticized Mulcair a lot, but never understood why the Quebec Liberal thing kept getting thrown out there as proof that the NDP should have known better than to choose the guy. There are a lot of reasons for people to have issues with Mulcair having been leader, but why was THAT brought up over and over again? And why was it belabored, endlessly, by the federal Liberal sympathizers on this board? Who the hell were those folks to judge on that point?

All I know is I saw Mulcair twice on Politics with Don Newman (around 16 or 17 years ago) identifying himself as a supporter of Alan Rock when talking about who should succeed Chretien. He was on a panel with another Liberal MNA.

From what I've seen, Mulcair's support for right-wing politics went somewhat above-and-beyond what was forced on him by the limitations of being a federalist in Quebec. To take the most famous example, the fact that he had no other option but to join the Liberals didn't neccessitate having to get up in the Assembly and praise the labour policies of Margaret Thatcher.

That said, just as I would not judge Lyndon Johnson's record on civil-rights by what he did as a Dixiecrat congressman from Buttcrack Texas, but rather on what he did after attaining the highest powers of his career, I think we should judge Mulcair's record as a federal social democrat on what he did while leading a federal social democratic party. Admittedly, I am somewhat untutored in the details of that latter phase of Mulcair's career, and will leave it to others to debate.

I don’t think people think of him as a Tommy Douglas. He was definitely right of centre and he tried to make the NDP another Liberal party with a different name. I think he did that to appeal to Quebec voters. I resented it.

I think he was strong in the House of Commons and he attacked Harper very well. He was a strong leader and was very articulate in his position. But that’s it.

He was also ruthless to people who supported Palestinians and we lost some very good candidates because of this. My opinion is good riddance.

out of all the leaders that will end up with seats in the house, he’s hands down the best one! And also the best for Canadians. Now I guess you really don’t have to personally like the person to recognize his abilities? But he’s the best option.

I personally think he’s an opportunist and I can see some things in him that others can jump on, but that’s all minor stuff

I agree with nicky on this one. Sure, Mulcair becoming a columnist with a right-wing newspaper raises a few eyebrows, but we'll know for sure what is happening after we've seen more of what he has to write.

I agree with nicky on this one. Sure, Mulcair becoming a columnist with a right-wing newspaper raises a few eyebrows, but we'll know for sure what is happening after we've seen more of what he has to write.

out of all the leaders that will end up with seats in the house, he’s hands down the best one! And also the best for Canadians.

Uh . . . that's not saying much. Look at the alternatives.

Not saying much if you really think stating the obvious isn’t important?

Regardless, the imperialist corporate media controls the will of Canadians in many ways. The imperialist corporate media has already successfully brainwashed the masses to substitute reality with fictional materialism well before I was even born. The icm will now navigate the voters according to the corporations biding.

Mulcair is under the influence of materialism therefore he’s a stooge for the corporations. I could be wrong? But I doubt Thomas would do anything to prove me wrong.

It's funny how a Liberal MP , MNA, MPP, etc.. are all scum until it's convenient.

I never bought him as a New Democrat and I thought everyone else would share the sentiment here. But no....Thomas changes his name to Tom and everyone thinks he's Tommy Douglas.

He was and always has been a typical Liberal that leans slightly to the right. Just a corporate suit with no intention on improving our decrepid society in any way .

Nobody EVER thought Mulcair was Tommy Douglas.

Perhaps. But if you can go to old threads from when Thomas Mulcair became the leader of the NDP, I had been attacking him and exposing him as the right leaning Liberal that he actually is.

Quit defending him. Trust me, you wouldn't be doing so 15 years ago.

I'm NOT defending him. Mulcair should never have been the leader. It's not defending Mulcair simply to point out that nobody was ever delusional enough to think he was even remotely similar to Tommy Douglas. And as to absurd comparisons, not only was Mulcair not Tommy, it was ridiculous for anybody to think that voting to replace NDP MPs with Liberal MPs could ever, in any universe, have been a vote for a candidate to that NDP MPs' left. Nobody but the wealthy benefited from the Liberal Party taking seats from the NDP.

I'm not going to echo the right wing branding of Trudeau by calling him by his first name.

Trudeau should step down for someone who at least seems more responsible. Having said that, it's the PARTY that creates policies. It's the party that writes out their platform.

Like it or not, The Liberals won a majority because Thomas Mulcair was pushing in centrists and moderates. The Liberals ran LEFT of the NDP as the NDP went the old school Liberal/Conservative way. We all know how that story went.

I'm not going to cheerlead Scheer, not even for money. You are all conveniently or ignorantly cheerlerading for the CPC. Who the hell do you think will take over from the Liberals? I'll give you a hint : it ain't gonna be the NDP.

So I have made up my mind and will vote Liberal again because they promised to expunge the records of those arrested,convicted and/or went to jail. They also promised to do something about our 25 year old at this point,huge social problem which is housing. Fuck health care. I think our system is good. It needs to be expanded but it's not a massive issue. What is however is the housing crisis nobody even talks about.

And this is more important to me than voting for a party that can hardly break 20% hence not having a chance in hell of making up the government in 2019.

Mulcair is trashing Trudeau because that's the fashionable thing to do. You can't shit all over the Liberal party's priorites of expunging criminal records and doing something about HOUSING. Our cities are turning into a playground exclusively for the rich. Housing is more important to me than Trudeau bashing.

Unfortunately, by betraying his promise on electoral reform "Justin" has presented us with the false choice once again of Conservatives vs the Just a Little Bit BBetter than The Conservatives Party.

The Liberals could have legislated a simple blanket pardon to everyone with a conviction for possession of cannabis but instead have promised a cumbersome and expensive alternative. No thanks.

And if you believe they will alieviate the housing problem you must believe that this will be the first promise they ever keep.

However bad Scheer may me, it sticks in my craw that his awfulness is thrust in our faces as the reason we have to vote for a callow narcistic unprincipled mediocrity who would not be considered fit for a small town school board were it not for his pedigree.

Unfortunately, by betraying his promise on electoral reform "Justin" has presented us with the false choice once again of Conservatives vs the Just a Little Bit BBetter than The Conservatives Party.

The Liberals could have legislated a simple blanket pardon to everyone with a conviction for possession of cannabis but instead have promised a cumbersome and expensive alternative. No thanks.

And if you believe they will alieviate the housing problem you must believe that this will be the first promise they ever keep.

However bad Scheer may me, it sticks in my craw that his awfulness is thrust in our faces as the reason we have to vote for a callow narcistic unprincipled mediocrity who would not be considered fit for a small town school board were it not for his pedigree.

What party keeps all their promises? I remember a couple of years ago when someone said they'd eat their hat if the Liberals legalized cannabis. Guess what? They did. I hope that hat wasn't too large.

If they are going to keep that promise, I have faith that they will do something about our housing situation,

There is absolutely,positively no fucking chance that I'm going to accept Scheer. I don't care who he is up against. Unless it's Bernier's party.

Sorry. I very much disagree with you. There is NEVER a reason to sit by and idly let the CPC come back to power,especially after 10 years of fuckhead Harper. We just got rid of them, no one ever learns their lesson. apparently.

"Trudeau" is a far better choice than Scheer. And the Liberals are leagues and leagues better than the CPC. FACT.

BTW, your average everyday Canadian doesn't care about electoral reform. I can assure you that that won't be an issue in October. The only people who support and understand electoral reform are political junkies. Your average Canadian couldn't give 2 shits.

I'm not going to cheerlead Scheer, not even for money. You are all conveniently or ignorantly cheerlerading for the CPC. Who the hell do you think will take over from the Liberals? I'll give you a hint : it ain't gonna be the NDP.

If memory serves from the Québec election threads, you live in Saint-Henri-Sainte-Anne provincially, which would put you in Ville-Marie–Le-Sud-Ouest–Île-des-Soeurs federally. In this area, the fight for the last two elections was between the Liberals and the NDP, with the Conservatives so far behind that no possible Liberal vote split (even if voters split evenly between the NDP, the Greens, and the Bloc) would've delivered it to a Conservative.

Now, I really dislike the "strategic voting" argument, since it amounts to "I'm not voting the way I'd like to because everybody else is also not voting the way they'd like to", and since Québec in particular has proven that Liberal votes aren't set in stone. But if you're going to vote strategically, vote strategically – like you live in the riding you live in, not in some suburban Toronto one where the Liberals and Tories are neck-and-neck and the NDP's lucky to break 10%.

You make perfect sense and your words are worth keeping in mind. My fear is the CPC becomes the government, they do NOTHING about housing,they strangle the pot stores out of business and redistribute the market back to the underground. The Liberals are running on the deficit. The Cons get elected and it will be the same old same old with these bastards, 'Oh, the Liberals left us with a huge deficit and now we're going to have to make some tough choices'

Tory times are hard times. Especially if you are poor and that includes the working poor.

My riding is just what you said. Maybe I don't have to vote Liberal but if the Libs and Cons were neck and neck, it would be my DUTY to vote Liberal.

I'll tell you why I get triggered by Conservatives. Everything I said above. I don't buy into the false equivilancy between the Conservatives and the Liberals. I would rather live for the next 40 years with the Liberals in power than the Conservatives for 4 years.

This is where I'm coming from. You don't have to agree with me but that's my motivation.

The Liberals may have "legalized" cannabis possession by removing it from criminal sanction.

They have however sattached so many administraqtive penalties to aspects of possession that it is scarcely legal or convenient to possess. They have also deferred major aspects of regulation to the provinces which have often attached rediculous restrictions.

As well, the Liberals have resisted a blanket pardon for poossession convictions.

You you may remember F R Scott's poem about another Liberal PM, Mackenzie King, in which he wrote: "Never do anything by halves that you can do by quarters."

The Liberals HAVE legalized cannabis.. No quotations needed. Try he big mistake was giving the provinces the power to regulate it thenselves

I can attest, I live in Quebec.

But the prohibition Is done. Good policy

Expunging criminal records is also good policy

It may bother you that the Liberals were more progressive in the last general election than the NDP. If it were the NDP you'd be celebrating this so you are kind of a charade

The NDP need at least 9 points to become relevant. They need another Layton and they need a coherent platform. As for if the Liberals will lose support over electoral support, I don't see that happening